Show A JUDICIAL extravaganza we respectfully submit to judge henderson this finding of two facts derived from the late trial before VS bis honor of wm swansea lewis for ua on lawf laffal al cohabitation and from other cases of somewhat similar character 1 the federal courts of utah with their whimsical interpretations of the F edmunds act of 1882 are responsible for the degradation and sorrow which have fallen upon the plural wife of lewis through the birth of her last child and they are responsible for that childs proscribed existence 2 the federal courts of utah by their extrajudicial extra judicial method ol of granting amnesty to a convicted offender who will whine loud load enough when called for sentence are bringing law into disrepute and are encouraging its violation concerning the first fact it Is well known that men believed they would be sustained by the district courts in living livin geach each with any one wife whom they might select this wis was an inhuman permission for it opened the door to any scoundrel it if any there were in plural marriage who might wish tj cast off in an aged lawful wife and devote all his bis time and means to the of a younger and more attractive woman who this very law declared could hold no legal relation to him under this extraordinary interpretation william swansea lewis whose lawful wife was in a delicate I 1 physical condition lived during daring a part at least of 1886 with his plural wife it was only when this plural wife was about to become a mother that he be learned that their relationship was now proscribed by the courts and so he was obliged to desert her and return to the bosom of his lawful spouse in october 1886 the babe was born and the unhappy woman added it to her flock of little ones already numerous enough for her poverty and helplessness since ince then she has fias lived as best she could good god I 1 how wise and humane the courts are I 1 concerning the second fact it is certain that a man who has a supreme respect for the laws of he be land will not wilfully and persistently violate those laws until ontra outraged gd justice seizes him and then crawl in the dust to the judgment seat and beg tor for mercy when a man pleads guilty to an infraction of the edmunds act and then makes the promise premise which enables him to go free he be acknowledges one of two things either he was insincere when he entered into and when he continued his polygamous relations and therefore he deserves to suffer buffer for the vindication of justice or he is a coward whose intent is stronger than his bis nerve and who only dare obey the mandate of his conscience so long as he be can evade the grup grasp of the law and therefore he still deserves punishment the trouble with this astounding system of amnesty is that it can rarely reach any but the insincere man in an and the coward it thus becomes a caricature of clemency it causes one to feel like making baking a paraphrase and asking that mercy be tempered with a 4 little justice judge henderson well knows that the act of deserting a trusting woman and ajl helpless I 1 b ibes babes or the act of apostasy apo stacy irosa fr ciless any church supplies a defendant wit t no legitimate reason for demanding amnesty in order to be entitled to it he should por portray a characteristic more redeeming than hypocrisy or cowardice take ake tile the case of the man lewis as an instance it is true that his statement showed that he ahad bad unwittingly brought himself into the clutches of the law but there is something else in his case not unworthy 0 of tile th courts ware astonished that a speech something like the following did not fall from the lips of th the court when lewis stood up tor for sentence you claim to have no religion and no creed I 1 believe you on this point you claim to hold the law of the land in supreme regard Let us analyze this latter proposition when you yon became convinced that plural marriage was wrong why did you not make the best provision provi possible for toe the um fortunate victims victim s of your mistake I 1 mean your plural wife and her children and then confine your marital attention to the one whom the law to hold bold in conjugal rela relation tiou you must have known that holding the views of religion which you yon did hold a continuance of cohabitation with the younger woman was adulterous morally as well as legally you must have known that to beget tie et children by this por poor creature was little less than diabolical for the mother could not claim recognition as a legal wife and the offspring were bound to be condemned as atiel illegitimate litigate liti mate for a defendant who is sincere in the practice of plural marriage who honors his bis covenants with his wives and who stands up like a man to receive sentence after conviction I 1 can have some respect even goough I 1 give him the severest sentence known to the law jaw in ordea to answer the demand of public molicy policy but for a man who has violated violate the law simply because violations of law were fashionable who has deserted a sickly legal wife and taken up his bis abode with a younger woman simply because he could do it without fear of punishment I 1 have nothing g but oun contempt tempt and I 1 cannot feel that he be deserves less than the infliction of the maximum penalty provided lor buch cases any other decree of this court would be a direct encouragement to men to violate law and then chuckle buckle at the ease with which the they could outwit justice I 1 ogden herall herald |